Leading-edge growth vs Catching-up growth, in the words of Alex Tabarrok. Catching-up growth is an affair of a few decades ... not sustainable. Trying to sustain it leads to exhaustion, then collapse. If the PRC leadership is smart, they will begin a transition to leading-edge growth before nature forces it upon them. More generally, the authoritarian Communist model has only worked (briefly) in a few places and utterly failed elsewhere. Since WWII, what we may have been witnessing are certain particular strengths of specific cultures rather than government-systemic features. Finally, growth beyond a sustainable level is, overall, undesirable and should not be a goal. I find Wolff's arguments unpersuasive.
Leading-edge growth vs Catching-up growth, in the words of Alex Tabarrok. Catching-up growth is an affair of a few decades ... not sustainable. Trying to sustain it leads to exhaustion, then collapse. If the PRC leadership is smart, they will begin a transition to leading-edge growth before nature forces it upon them. More generally, the authoritarian Communist model has only worked (briefly) in a few places and utterly failed elsewhere. Since WWII, what we may have been witnessing are certain particular strengths of specific cultures rather than government-systemic features. Finally, growth beyond a sustainable level is, overall, undesirable and should not be a goal. I find Wolff's arguments unpersuasive.